Doing time with Cameron Clyne (sorry Patsy)

Can a chairman remain silent for so long? In fact the orchestrator of WF exit from SR commentary on how he will continue to support WA with rugby has been deafening with silence. Sure Castle has said little things here and there of no real significance, but really without Twiggy rugby of all standards in WA would be struggling if not on the endangered list.

How has Clyne got away for so long without answering questions, discussing the outcomes of sacking the WF from rugby and how he was going to ensure the sport was not lost in WA. He was going to support WA in this tough time I’m sure he said something along those lines yet we’ve heard next to nothing of a plan to do this other than relying on the good deeds of individuals that have kept the sport a float.

He continues to fail rugby!
Where is the money saved for grassroots?
What is he doing to make this sport popular across the nation?
Has SR been significantly better without the force?

Communication is poor and he treats the stakeholders of the game which is the players and fans like mushrooms.
No wonder his skin is pasty as he hides in his NSW ivory rugby tower and won’t come out in fear of critcism.

He feeds everyone scraps and expects the sport to thrive.

Get a grip Clyne, grow some and work with rugby community across the country - not just in your safe haven of the east coast.

Further to add the only person to interview the parasite outside of a press conference and Senate Inquiry is Alan Jones and he destroyed him.

The RA as an organisation have not from learnt from John O'Neill's mess and needs to be torn apart completely by an outside body. O'Neill walked away with 2.7 million while holding a separate directorship from memory was Tourism NSW and he signed a twenty year agreement for Sydney to host the 1st Bledisloe test which meant the 4 Nations draw hasn't changed since Argentina were introduced in to the comp. Campo was the only truly vocal person to call O'Neill out on his directorship and it fell on deaf ears.

This was the same bloke that was willing to put the Force in to the SA conference if the Kings got in to Super Rugby ahead of the Rabble in 2011.

Not only did O'Neill bugger the RA he severely damaged SANZAR in 1996 and 2010 due to his own self interests.

Ok, tinfoil hat time. Is it possible clyne and co are really geniuses and cut the force knowing twiggy would support them financially leaving the extra money for the tahs and Sydney lunches / grass roots rugby? Could they be looking for a billionaire in Canberra or Melbourne to do the same? Or hoping if they cut one of them that twiggy takes them over too?

Ok, tinfoil hat time. Is it possible clyne and co are really geniuses and cut the force knowing twiggy would support them financially leaving the extra money for the tahs and Sydney lunches / grass roots rugby? Could they be looking for a billionaire in Canberra or Melbourne to do the same? Or hoping if they cut one of them that twiggy takes them over too?

Except there's been no extra money for grassroots rugby (from reports on the various rugby forums most rugby clubs have seen less money coming out of RA), and the Tahs have lost their top try-scorer this year to Europe, so it doesn't look like they have benefitted from the extra money, either.

0

Don't tell me the sky's the limit when there are footprints on the moon

and the Brumbies will be down to one ex Force player Peni who will be lucky to keep his contract after back to back suspensions. From what I know the Brumbies are actually looking at alternate options as they get sweet fa assistance from the RA.

12:00AM AUGUST 9, 2018
67 COMMENTS
National Australia Bank may face criminal charges over a probe by the corporate regulator into the company’s “suspected offending”, amid revelations the lender charged fees of more than $3 million to dead people.

Financial services royal commissioner Kenneth Hayne also raised the prospect that NAB’s taking of money “to which there was no entitlement” for services it never provided might be a crim*inal offence during an at-times torrid day of hearings yesterday.

The proceedings also laid bare NAB’s unsuccessful attempts to convince the Australian Securities & Investments Commission that it should not have to pay full compensation to customers slugged with fees for which they received no service, and revealed the slow pace at which it moved other clients out of old high-fee funds into a cheaper *option, as *required by law.

READ NEXT

COMMENT
Smears won’t erase dad’s spirit
JOHANNES LEAK
It is believed ASIC’s investigation relates to multiple alleged breaches of corporate laws and the regulator has yet to decide whether to strike a deal with the bank, pursue civil litigation or go for criminal prosecution.

In her second day in the royal commission witness stand, Nicole Smith, the chairwoman of NAB’s super trustee company NULIS, was forced to admit there was an inherent conflict between the for-profit *nature of the business and looking after the interests of super fund members.

NULIS has estimated that 4135 members may have been affected by the *adviser service fees charged to dead people. They were charged an average of $730, totalling $3.01m. It is believed the fees are no longer being charged and a *remediation plan is being developed.

NAB’s graveyard sting emerged a day after ASIC revealed the potential compensation bill that banks would have to pay to victims of the “fee for no service” scandal across the industry could exceed $850m.

Ms Smith, who is set to give further evidence this morning, said the company began looking into whether it had been charging fees from dead customers in May, after the fact that the Commonwealth Bank had been doing so for years was exposed at commission hearings. She said NAB, which ranked as one of the nation’s biggest lenders, told ASIC it had been charging the dead fees in May or June this year.

The commission was also shown a letter from ASIC to NAB, headlined “Outline of suspected offending by the NAB group” relating to 10 entities within the bank involved in a broader “fees for no service” *scandal.

Mr Hayne had asked Ms Smith whether she had “any contemplation of a criminal proceeding” against NAB for charging a “plan service fee”, which was supposed to be for general financial advice, to people who did not have a *financial planner. “Not at this time, no,” she responded.

Mr Hayne asked: “Did you think … taking money to which there was no entitlement raised a question of the criminal law?”

Late yesterday, the NAB succeeded in keeping secret, at least until this morning, parts of the document that might shed more light on ASIC’s continuing probe.

Objecting to the tendering of parts of the letter, counsel for the bank, Neil Young QC, said the material related to ongoing negotiations between NAB and ASIC involving not only how customers would be compensated but also “other aspects of liability or culpability relating to previous conduct, and how those matters might be resolved between ASIC and ourselves”.

Mr Hayne put off until this morning arguments on whether the full ASIC letter should be publicly aired.

Parts of the document revealed so far show that complaints to the NAB from cus*tom*ers who say they paid money but got nothing in return date back to 2009.

Some 40 complaints responded to between 2012 and 2015 resulted in compensation of more than $155,000, ASIC said.

“Client’s son has raised a concern regarding an ongoing service fee of 1.1 per cent on the client’s *account for the past 15 years without ongoing service provided to clients,” read one complaint singled out by ASIC.

In another case, “client alleges lack of ongoing service from Nov*ember 2009 to March 2011”.

Mr Young earned the ire of Mr Hayne by claiming the document was irrelevant to the evidence that would be given by Ms Smith.

“You will not give her her answer, Mr Young. You will not,” Mr Hayne said, pointing his finger at the bank’s counsel. “Do you understand me?”

Mr Young: “I’ve done nothing of the sort, commissioner.”

Commission hearings in April revealed that planners at a CBA subsidiary continued to charge people fees for years after they had died.